Breeding like with like

I am heartened to note that the Jiyo Parsi scheme has been launched. It should educate and enlighten the Parsi Zoroastrian community in India and the diaspora regarding the seriousness of the demographic decline. I have noted from many articles and readers’ comments that although the scheme has been welcomed by the majority, many people have reservations because fertility treatment is not offered to Parsi women married outside the community and hence the full benefits of this project are lost.
I wish to add some food for thought regarding this lament and offer a different perspective. The fact that children of Parsi men are accepted as "Parsi” is more a historical, legal and social classification than a biological fact. If only one partner is Parsi, the children cannot be classified as Parsi in the true biological sense. We are an ethno-religious community. Our ethnicity should be valued and embraced as much as our faith. This holds true not only for Parsis but for other minority ethnic communities all over the globe like the Native Americans, Australian Aborigines and indigenous tribes of India. For such people, will marrying outside their group strengthen the ethnicity, religious beliefs, customs and traditions of their progeny and preserve the world’s ethnic and cultural mosaic?
With the rapid decline of the natural world, scientists and wildlife conservationists know the importance of breeding like with like. In China efforts are underway to breed giant pandas only with each other. Today, very few American bison, because of decimation of the species by white settlers and subsequent contact with domestic cattle, have pure bison genes. The majority have mainly cattle genes. There is an ongoing movement to breed the few remaining pure bison to ensure ongoing genetic diversity in the natural world.
The Jiyo Parsi scheme with the backing of the designated committee and high priests should have had the conviction and foresight to make it mandatory for both partners to be Parsis. This also ensures that there is no unfairness and no human rights violations towards women. Neither Parsi men nor Parsi women will then have the liberty to decimate the community further. From a practical aspect, looking into the future, what will the face of the Parsi community look like if this is not taken into account? Who, will the progeny of today’s inter-racial couples marry? Will we be able to call ourselves Parsi or will we have to coin another word for the deliberate and random admixture?
The American Jewish community faces a similar dilemma. Wikipedia states: "While not all Jews disapprove of intermarriage, many members of the Jewish community have become concerned that the high rate of interfaith marriage will result in the eventual disappearance of the American Jewish community. Intermarriage rates have risen from roughly six percent in 1950 to 71% in 2013. This, in combination with the comparatively low birth rate, has led to a five percent decline in the Jewish population of the United States in the 1990s …only 33% of intermarried couples provide their children with a Jewish upbringing…”
This was brought to the community’s attention by Malcolm Bhesania in his talk at the 2014 North American Zoroastrian Congress in Los Angeles.
Of course, this fertility project is only one part of the solution to our declining demographics. If at the other end of the spectrum inter-racial and inter-faith marriages continue (the estimate is about 30% in India and 60% in the US) the community will continue to hemorrhage. True, it is a fact that finding the right Parsi partner is becoming exceedingly difficult because of our demographic decline and apathy. It certainly will not get any better for the next generation and then who exactly will a Parsi be if we continue with the "acceptance” theory? The fact that you may choose to label someone as a Parsi does not necessarily mean that the person is one in the true sense of the word.
So let us look at the whole picture and where it will take us into the future. The issue is not a tug of war between the "traditionalists” and the "liberals,” ethno-religious superiority or prejudice, but of preservation of a legacy handed down to us through the ages that we should hold dear. It is an issue of intellectual honesty and common sense. At this time we should actually be raising the bar and not lowering it. ZAVER SHROFF-PATEL
Sunnyvale, California, USA
sapatel1@sbcglobal.net